> On 19 Jun 2018, at 07:24, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 6/18/2018 4:33 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 12:01 AM, Brent Meeker <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> On 6/17/2018 2:24 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 17, 2018, <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 12:29:35 PM UTC, Jason wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 6:26 AM, <[email protected] <>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 10:15:05 AM UTC, Jason wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:12 AM, <[email protected] <>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> why do you prefer the MWI compared to the Transactional Interpretation? I >>> see both as absurd. so I prefer to assume the wf is just epistemic, and/or >>> that we have some holes in the CI which have yet to be resolved. AG >>> -- >>> >>> >>> 1. It's the simplest theory: "MWI" is just the Schrodinger equation, >>> nothing else. (it doesn't say Schrodinger's equation only applies >>> sometimes, or only at certain scales) >>> >>> 2. It explains more while assuming less (it explains the appearance of >>> collapse, without having to assume it, thus is preferred by Occam's razor) >>> >>> 3. Like every other successful physical theory, it is linear, reversible >>> (time-symmetric), continuous, deterministic and does not require faster >>> than light influences nor retrocausalities >>> >>> 4. Unlike single-universe or epistemic interpretations, "WF is real" with >>> MWI is the only way we know how to explain the functioning of quantum >>> computers (now up to 51 qubits) >>> >>> 5. Unlike copenhagen-type theories, it attributes no special physical >>> abilities to observers or >>> measurement devices >>> >>> 6. Most of all, theories of everything that assume a reality containing all >>> possible observers and observations lead directly to laws/postulates of >>> quantum mechanics (see Russell Standish's Theory of Nothing >>> <http://www.hpcoders.com.au/theory-of-nothing.pdf>, Chapter 7 and Appendix >>> D). >>> >>> Given #6, we should revise our view. It is not MWI and QM that should >>> convince us of many worlds, but rather the assumption of many worlds (an >>> infinite and infinitely varied reality) that gives us, and explains all the >>> weirdness of QM. This should overwhelmingly convince us of MWI-type >>> everything theories over any single-universe interpretation of quantum >>> mechanics, which is not only absurd, but completely devoid of explanation. >>> With the assumption of a large reality, QM is made explainable and >>> understandable: as a theory >>> of observation within an infinite reality. >>> >>> Jason >>> >>> You forgot #7. It asserts multiple, even infinite copies of an observer, >>> replete with memories, are created when an observer does a simple quantum >>> experiment. So IMO the alleged "cure" is immensely worse than the disease, >>> CI, that is, just plain idiotic. AG >>> >>> >>> There are many atoms, many planets, many solar systems, many galaxies, many >>> Hubble volumes, and it is believed many universes. On what basis are you >>> so certain there aren't many histories? (That is, other states in the wave >>> function that are predicted to be there by our well established scientific >>> theories, but which the theory explains we cannot see or interact with >>> except in very limited controlled manners)? >>> >>> If you find MWI distasteful you might prefer to think of it as the >>> many-minds interpretation as described by Heinz-Dieter Zeh, or the >>> "zero-universe interpretation" as explained by Ron Garrett: >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc >>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc> >>> >>> I think you are hung up on the "creation", I think it is conceptually >>> easier to grasp under the understanding that it is all already there. If >>> you look at the homepage of Wei Dai (who founded this e-mailing list >>> <http://www.weidai.com/everything.html> 20 years ago) he outlines what he >>> calls "a very simple interpretation of quantum mechanics >>> <http://www.weidai.com/qm-interpretation.txt>" which is basically this: all >>> the states are already there. >>> >>> Sounds like Super-Determinism proposed by t'Hooft, and referenced yesterday >>> by Brent, which proposes the universe knows beforehand what kind of >>> experiment Joe the Plumber will perform. Too ridiculous for my tastes, and >>> of course untestable. IMO, one of the "achievements" of quantum theory is >>> to make otherwise intelligent persons totally gullible in what they believe >>> as plausible. AG >>> >>> >>> I agree with you about super derterminism being too ridiculous to believe. >>> But super derterminism is a different animal from "block time". Super >>> derterminism is the idea that the universe conspires against all >>> experimenters and knows what they will measure before they measure it, and >>> chooses values they will measure to make things work out. It's reminiscent >>> of Descartes evil demon. It requires an evil God. >> >> You've anthropomorphized the universe. The universe doesn't conspire or do >> anything, it just is. Experimenters are just physical systems (as they are >> in MWI) so it's not strange that in a deterministic theory (and MWI claims >> to be deterministic) their actions should also be determined. >> >> >> See my reply on this regarding Pi and the Stock Market. There is a major >> gulf between determinism and super determinism. Super determinism requires >> "something operating behind the scenes to fool us" either at the time of the >> universe's creation or with the creation of each photon pair. > > So what. That's what determinism means. It means EVERYTHING IS DETERMINED > BY THE PAST. > > Read t'Hooft. > >> Regular determinism doesn't. > > Define "regular" determinism.
Everything is determined. Super-determinisme: everything is determined to make you belief in one world with very strange correlation looking like FTL action at a distance. I have no problem with determinism (and it is compatible with free-will). Super-determinisme is not a better explanation than “God made it that way, don’t try to understand”. Bruno > > Brent > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
